| Author |
Topic: Tone is in the hands |
Bobby Lee
From:
Cloverdale, California, USA
|
Posted 3 May 2006 10:12 am |
|
in another topic, Charlie McDonald said: quote:
The hammer strike is at 1/7 the string length to eliminate the undesirable seventh harmonic, but the lower order harmonics are still present.
(Harmonic content on a psg string will vary depending on where the string is plucked.)
This may be an obvious fact to piano tuner like Charlie, but it is not so obvious to many players who go from one brand of guitar to another searching for the perfect tone. The key to getting good overtone content from any guitar is in the placement of your right hand.
------------------
 Bobby Lee (a.k.a. b0b) - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6) My Blog |
|
|
|
Tracy Sheehan
From:
Fort Worth, Texas, USA
|
Posted 3 May 2006 11:15 am
|
|
I have to agree with b0b.The only steel that sounded different was the old msa which many agreed had a muddy tone.After playing one for years i was in Dallas and had Bud Carter put George L's pick ups in it.Sure made a difference.
But when Curly Chalker played a msa,well what can one say? His tone was great on any steel he played.
Different amp settings will get about any tone one would want on the later steels.
I had a SD Carter D10 and it had a great tone.Traded it in on a D10 Carter.Same great tone.
Last Sat.i bought a new SD10 GFI from Steve Lambs music here in Ft.Worth.Great tone on the GFI also.
IMHO i believe tone is in the hands and amp settings.
And no one is going to get a pro recording studio tone on any steel unless it is used in a studio.
Reece Anderson did a study on this years ago and as i recall,when the listener turned their back to Reece he would change steels and no one could tell the difference.
As i posted a while back,from the time pedal steels came out,Curly Chalker.Reece Anderson,Emmons,Day,etc.sounded the same.It was only the advance in recording technology that really changed sounds.My opinion only.
|
|
|
|
Jody Cameron
From:
Angleton, TX,, USA
|
Posted 3 May 2006 11:38 am
|
|
| AMEN! |
|
|
|
Daniel J. Cormier
From:
Lake Charles, LA, USA
|
Posted 3 May 2006 11:51 am
|
|
Double Amen.Ain't tone a Fickle Thing. Right hand for tone and blocking/Left hand for True Pitch.
------------------
Daniel J. Cormier Whatever D-10 I happen to have at the moment.
EVans FET 500 LV ,ProFex II
http://www.cajunsteelguitar.com email at djcormier@cox-internet.com 
|
|
|
|
Roger Rettig
From:
Naples, FL
|
Posted 3 May 2006 11:53 am
|
|
Hear, hear!
That's why I'm done with spending fortunes on different steels - I sound the same on whatever I play. I dunno if it sounds 'great' or not, but I'm consistent!
So I'll be playing this black LeGrande 111 until it falls apart.....
RR |
|
|
|
Randy Reeves
From:
LaCrosse, Wisconsin, USA
|
Posted 3 May 2006 12:07 pm
|
|
I would like to add that tone is in both hands.
I agree with the statements about right hand placement...to that I would add pick attack and other nuanced things we do with the right hand picking.
the left hand is important too. how the bar is handled definately adds to tone. |
|
|
|
David Wren
From:
Placerville, California, USA
|
Posted 3 May 2006 1:07 pm
|
|
Can't argue with anything said so far, with the exception of Tracy's comment re: "Studio Tone".... I remember seeing (hearing) Bobby Black in a large night club.... and his tone was as fine as anything I've ever heard on any recordings.
So I plan on replacing my PSG's at the rate I have so far, which means I'll need a new one in 15 years 
------------------
Dave Wren
'96 Carter S12-E9/B6,7X7; Twin Session 500s; Hilton Pedal; Black Box
www.ameechapman.com
|
|
|
|
Gary Shepherd
From:
Fox, Oklahoma, USA
|
Posted 3 May 2006 1:08 pm
|
|
It seems you guys left out an important fact...
You must hold your mouth right.
gs
------------------
Gary Shepherd
Carter D-10
www.16tracks.com
[This message was edited by Gary Shepherd on 03 May 2006 at 02:08 PM.] |
|
|
|
C. Christofferson
|
Posted 3 May 2006 1:28 pm
|
|
| A nice insider tip Bobby. I'll pay attention now and try to purposely overload the seventh harmonic to hear it's effect against the one in order to keep it out of there later. Also, things like this sometimes aren't noticable until it's you in the studio hearing (perhaps for the first time) all the unwanted noises that you didn't know you were making! |
|
|
|
Donny Hinson
From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
|
Posted 3 May 2006 2:40 pm
|
|
| Quote: |
| The hammer strike is at 1/7 the string length to eliminate the undesirable seventh harmonic... |
Well, when I read something like this, I just have to check (out of curiosity). Evidently, that 1/7th hammer-strike distance is not consistent for all pianos, or for all the strings on a piano.
Perhaps Charlie, or someone else, would care to comment on this?
Also, I don't really care for the term "undesirable overtones". Undesirable? In whose opinion? I happen to notice (and you might, too), that very few straight guitar players use the same pick-point on the strings for rhythm and for lead. So, which one has "bad" overtones?  In general, I don't believe they care about overtones. I think it's much simpler than that. If you want the sharp tone, you pick near the bridge. If you want a fuller tone, you pick near the center of the string. If you want something in between, you pick somewhere in between!
Is this not the case?
I think we reach a point in music where scientific analysis does little but muddy the waters.[This message was edited by Donny Hinson on 03 May 2006 at 03:56 PM.] |
|
|
|
Bobby Lee
From:
Cloverdale, California, USA
|
Posted 3 May 2006 3:52 pm
|
|
| Quote: |
| In general, I don't believe they care about overtones. I think it's much simpler than that. If you want the sharp tone, you pick near the bridge. If you want a fuller tone, you pick near the center of the string. If you want something in between, you pick somewhere in between! |
But, uh, I thought that a "fuller tone" is one with more overtones.  |
|
|
|
Jennings Ward
From:
Edgewater, Florida, R.I.P.
|
Posted 3 May 2006 6:23 pm
|
|
AND I THOUGHT THAT TONE, OR THE SOUND WE PERCIEVE TO BE TON , ORIGINATED " BETWEEN THE EARS""" DID SOMEONE CHANGE THAT FACT??
JENNINGS U PK'''''''''''''''''''
------------------
EMMONS D10 10-10 profex 2 deltafex ne1000 pv1000, pv 31 bd eq, +
|
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 3 May 2006 10:09 pm
|
|
I think scientific analysis is relevant here. Certainly where and how hard one picks a string affects the proportion of various overtones that are excited. Picking more softly and near the middle of the string excites a higher proportion of fundamental and lower harmonic overtones, giving the characteristic mellower tone. Conversely, picking harder and near the end of the string excites a higher proportion of higher harmonic overtones, giving brighter tonalities. I think every guitar has certain picking sweet spots, and I vary where I pick a lot, doesn't matter whether it's a guitar, steel, or banjo - and no wisecracks please. 
On guitar, I notice a lot more difference in the intrinsic guitar designs than I do on pedal steel. There's a helluva big difference between a solid guitar like a Telecaster or Les Paul and an archtop, for example. Part of that may be the pickup or other hardware, but part of that is the physical design - I have experimented enough with different pickups and hardware on either to feel pretty confident about that. But pedal steels strings seem, to me, to operate much more closely as "ideal strings", with very long sustain. In the last 6 years, I've gone through Emmons P/P, Sho Bud, Franklin, Sierra, BMI, and Zum guitars - there are certain things that are different, like the amount of sustain in the high register. But if the parameters are tweaked - like pickups, amp settings, and so on - I found I could get "my tone" (such as it is) on any of them. Tweaking a Tele like that produces a lot of versatile sounds, but I have yet to hear one that really sounds quite like an archtop - even Ed Bickert's. The typical archtop note envelope just naturally decays much more quickly, and it's a very audible difference. I don't notice anything obvious like that in any pedal steels I've played.
This is an academicians way of saying "I basically agree - on pedal steel".
Of course, we process the sound between the ears. But given a fixed listener, now there are differences in tone which depend on how that tone is produced. IMO. |
|
|
|
David Mason
From:
Cambridge, MD, USA
|
Posted 4 May 2006 3:49 am
|
|
| Quote: |
| ...very few straight guitar players use the same pick-point on the strings for rhythm and for lead. So, which one has "bad" overtones? In general, I don't believe they care about overtones. I think it's much simpler than that. If you want the sharp tone, you pick near the bridge. If you want a fuller tone, you pick near the center of the string. If you want something in between, you pick somewhere in between! |
This is meant to be a joke, right? Are you saying that people like Duane Allman, Carlos Santana, Eric Johnson and Steve Morse didn't know what they were doing and couldn't have told you exactly why they were picking in particular places to emphasize particular overtones or families of overtones, relative to their left hand position? Are there any reasons at all that they had such great tone, or is it all just accidental? Have you read any interviews with them? Of course it's "much simpler than that" - but only for six-stringers destined to remain hacks forever.
When one great guitarist after another, steel and standard guitar, tells you "it's all in the hands", do you think that they're being deliberately obscure? It's really all in the breakfast muffin, or the brand of strings, or "divine" intervention? How often have you seem the case: the same guitar, same setup, even picking the same notes, yet different players have different tone - believe it or not, there are concrete, rational, and repeatable reasons why. |
|
|
|
John Daugherty
From:
Rolla, Missouri, USA
|
Posted 4 May 2006 3:53 am
|
|
You don't have to understand the physics of the sound you are playing on a steel guitar. Just move your right hand to a place that produces the sound you want and pick the strings in a manner that produces the sound you want.
If I stopped to analyze every little detail of my technique, I wouldn't have time to play the darn thing ...... or maybe end up on a couch in a dark office paying someone $100/hour to listen to me talk.
The human lifespan isn't long enough to learn the physics behind every operation we perform.
Did you take a course in electronics to understand the electron flow inside the amp while you are playing or adjusting it? You don't have to do that... just adjust the knobs until it sounds good.
I think that is more or less what Donny was suggesting.
As ET said "just leave that boy alone and let him play his song".
------------------
www.home.earthlink.net/~johnd37
|
|
|
|
Charlie McDonald
From:
out of the blue
|
Posted 4 May 2006 4:52 am
|
|
Pianos aren't psg's. ('Duh', you all say.)
My comments were on a thread about keyless guitars, and I was replying to a discussion about 'overtones' versus sympathetic vibrations, relating that to harmonic content, so it's somewhat out of context in this topic. And certainly I wasn't trying to roil up the already muddy waters.
Nonetheless: the seventh harmonic lies between the 6th of a scale and the flat 7th.
That wouldn't be fitting in an equally tempered scale, but there are other scales, like the Middle Eastern scale, which uses the natural 7th harmonic, producing a sharp sixth or a really flat seventh (as compared to the Western scale). Thus, there are no inherently bad 'overtones,' just differing cultural adaptations to the harmonic series, and I'm not sure that overtones and harmonics are always the same thing.
In addition, a piano hammer hits perpendicular to the string, whereas we pick at a less than perpenducular angle.
So most of this doesn't fit with variable pitch instruments like psg, but both are percussion instruments, so some theory applies.
To eliminate the 7th harmonic, the hammer strike creates a node at 1/7th the length of the string--on a concert class piano.
Inexpensive pianos have many compromises with regard to scaling. And Donny is right, that node varies, particularly in the high treble, where one wants the notes to be as bright as possible, and the 7th harmonic is above the limit of hearing.
Thus in a piano, all the elements are fixed, and in a psg they are variable.
So I would have to agree with John D.'s summation and other comments that say you don't have to know physics to play steel guitar. You pick your sweet spots and play there. Characterizations such as 'fuller' or 'brighter' are subjective at best. (I like a 'warmer' tone, so I might pick around the 3rd or 4th harmonic nodes.)
You can pick your friends, and you can pick your nodes.
I personally agree that you must hold your mouth right. 
[This message was edited by Charlie McDonald on 04 May 2006 at 06:05 AM.] |
|
|
|
Jim Sliff
From:
Lawndale California, USA
|
Posted 4 May 2006 5:10 am
|
|
No doubt good tone is on the hands (and mindset). David Lindley sounded great on cheap Japanese guitars on Jackson Browne's stuff.
But once you hi the point of being able to get "good tone" consistently, then equipment tweaking can be used to fine-tune or individualize it. That's the fun...but expensive...part
The sad thing is to see players comment regularly about the last gadget they bought (while running ads for the previous one) who are "chasing" good tone, thinking it MUST be the instrument/amp/effect killing them.
It's not, and if more players would forget all the gearhead stuff, "run what ya' brung" and learn how to play it right, they'd save a ton of money and aggravation.
And also half the posts on the forum would be gone.
;-) |
|
|
|
Donny Hinson
From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
|
Posted 4 May 2006 5:14 am
|
|
| Quote: |
| But, uh, I thought that a "fuller tone" is one with more overtones. |
Though that might seem logical at first, I don't believe that's the case. The two instruments that I know are simply loaded with overtones are cymbals and a fuzz guitar. Yet, neither of these can be considered "full sounding", IMHO. In the case of pedal steels, Emmons guitara are supposedly quite noted for their rich overtones, yet they sound rather thin and "chimey" to my ears. I've never heard anyone characterize an Emmons as a "full sounding" guitar. Of course, even the old MSA's are characterized as "dark and thick" by some, while being considered "thin and brittle" by others. There's a lot going on here, and no two people hear things in exactly the same way. Common terms such as "tone" and "intonation" often seem to get confused, and small amounts of distortion may improve the sound (to some), and degrade it, to some others.
In the end, I'm not saying that sceintific study isn't germane in regards to instruments, but rather that instruments seem to be tailored more by the ear and by trial an error than they are by complex mathematical formulas and scientific study. One can't generalize and say that, for instance, heavy instruments are fuller-sounding than light instruments. The old Fender steels, I believe, illustrate that point very well! I also believe that studies and design theories done on other instruments, like a piano, have little bearing to a pedal steel, whose strings are plucked rather than hammered, whose body has no sounding board, and whose effective string lengths are constantly being altered.
A steel guitar, rather than just being a simple solid-bodied instrument, is a complex system, where dozens or perhaps hundreds of things come into play, even things as insignificant as screw placement and torque can have a significant effect on the sound. In the end, though, it's the player's hands, soul, and imagination, that makes the sound pleasing to us. An instrument is a tool, nothing more, and a good tool is better than a bad one. But the true beauty of music is brought forth by the player, and not by the instrument he's using. Very few people, playing Chet Atkins' guitar or Buddy Emmons' steel, would sound like Chet or Buddy, and that, I believe, lends credence to my theory that "it's in the hands".  |
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 4 May 2006 7:12 am
|
|
Of course, understanding complex mathematics and physics is not necessary to play an instrument. One can play completely empirically. But I think that understanding the basics of the physics of the instrument can help figure things out more quickly. For example, understanding the basics of string vibration - fundamental vs harmonics, vibrational nodes and maxima, and so on - is very useful to figure out where to pick and certainly to produce pick harmonics.
For example, one can make harmonics completely by trial and error. But please - it's not that difficult to understand why one should dampen the string at a harmonic node, and use the basic knowledge of string vibrations to figure out where they are. Or perhaps figure out where one should pick to emphasize a particular harmonic overtone.
When you add up all the things in a guitar or steel, along with the various effect and amplifiers, there are a lot of parameters that effect the tone, and a huge number of permutations. One can keep things very simple, or wander around a large parameter space aimlessly, and wind up with great sounds. That is a completely legitimate approach. But I think it's another legitimate approach to try to understand that space and be more methodical about it. Of course, in the end, it's the sound that counts. But I find the latter approach useful if I'm trying to find a wide range of sounds for widely different styles of playing, using different instruments.
I haven't heard anybody here argue against the idea that "tone is in the hands". I might amend to say, "tone is in the hands, and also the brain." IMO. |
|
|
|
Donny Hinson
From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
|
Posted 4 May 2006 7:51 am
|
|
| Quote: |
| This is meant to be a joke, right? Are you saying that people like Duane Allman, Carlos Santana, Eric Johnson and Steve Morse didn't know what they were doing and couldn't have told you exactly why they were picking in particular places to emphasize particular overtones or families of overtones, relative to their left hand position? |
No, it's not a "joke". And no, I don't believe many of the guitar greats have done scientific studies to tell them where to play. Get real! They play here or there because it sounds good, or because it gives the the particular tone they want. I find it hard to believe that most great players could tell you, or explain to you scientifically, exactly why a certain technique creates a certain sound. "Well, I pick at the third node because the first harmonic is only 3db down, while the 2nd and fourth harmonics are 10db and 15db down from the fundamental, and the 3rd harmonic creates reinforcement with the 9th...etc., etc.."
Is that what you're saying?
No, I believe they have learned, both through others and through trial and error, what gives them their sound. These guys are stylists and artists, they're not scientists, and I doubt even they would disagree. I also don't think players are being obscure if they say that a player's sound is "in his hands". That sounds simple and obscure to some, but it belies the amount of information, the amount of technique, that's really being used sometimes.
I've noticed very few players whose right hand is locked, position-wise, to their left. Most good guitarists do not exhibit a lot of right-hand movement. On the contrary, most of the great players I've watched have great economy in their right hand movements, they don't (as some here have insinuated) run their right hand up and down the strings with every movement of their left hand! (This would be a requirement if their picking technique was truly "nodal".)
I guess the best way to explain all this would be to give you the words of Curry Coster (a great local player) when a player asked him "I have the same guitar and amp that Buddy Emmons uses, so why don't I sound like Buddy?" Curry just smiled and said..."Because you don't have his hands!"
You get a great sound by doing it for decades, by practicing and playing for thousands of hours. In other words, it takes "time in the saddle". And, just like riding a horse, you aren't going to master it by reading a book, or from endless theoretical studies.[This message was edited by Donny Hinson on 04 May 2006 at 08:55 AM.] |
|
|
|
Adrienne Clasky
From:
Florida, USA
|
Posted 4 May 2006 7:54 am
|
|
| There have been many, many posts lately regarding "overtones." I have read them all. But, posters do not seem to agree on what they are. Could we define them, please, for a newbie? |
|
|
|
Doug Beaumier
From:
Northampton, MA
|
Posted 4 May 2006 7:54 am
|
|
My very first post on this forum back in.. 1999? or 98? was titled Tone is in the Head and the Hands. Not an original thought of mine, but a quote of Eddie VanHalen!
If two guitarists swap rigs, and tweak a few knobs, within 5 minutes each will have his own sound on the other guys equipment. I've witnessed it many times. Tone originates in the head of the player IMHO. |
|
|
|
Donny Hinson
From:
Glen Burnie, Md. U.S.A.
|
Posted 4 May 2006 7:58 am
|
|
| Bingo! |
|
|
|
Mark Eaton
From:
Sonoma County in The Great State Of Northern California
|
Posted 4 May 2006 8:03 am
|
|
David Wren wrote:
" I remember seeing (hearing) Bobby Black in a large night club.... and his tone was as fine as anything I've ever heard on any recordings."
Acouple of weeks ago, I saw Bobby on his Carter D-10, through his Jerry Walker Stereo Steel amp head, with a 15" JBL, in a decent-sized club in Sonoma.
I can only describe the tone as "jaw-dropping!"
You KNEW you were listening to a member of the Steel Guitar Hall of Fame.
------------------
Mark
[This message was edited by Mark Eaton on 04 May 2006 at 09:04 AM.] |
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 4 May 2006 8:24 am
|
|
| Donny - there's a big difference between needing to understand the detailed spectral analysis of plucking at various positions vs. finding it useful to understand the basics of the physics of vibrating strings. I advocated the latter, not the former. Engineers are the ones most interested in spectral analysis and dBs. It's often not necessary to precisely quantify relationships to use them effectively, and I'll bet a lot of us do just that. I argued that understanding can help figure things out - when playing, that needs to be practiced over and over so it's internalized and you don't have to think about it. I don't think we disagree at all here. |
|
|
|
